doorzo_search

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the behavioral disclosure burden. It states the core behavior (search across Japanese shops) but does not reveal potential nuances like filtering, sorting defaults, or that the keyword can be translated. The schema covers parameters, but the description adds little beyond the basic operation.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is a single sentence that is direct and front-loaded. It avoids unnecessary words and clearly communicates the tool's essence, making it highly concise.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

While the schema and output schema provide extensive detail, the description lacks contextual guidance such as when to use the tool, what types of results to expect, or any limitations. Given the tool's moderate complexity and absence of annotations, a slightly more informative description would improve completeness. However, the rich schema compensates partially.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description only mentions 'a keyword', which duplicates the schema's 'keyword' parameter without adding new meaning. All parameters are adequately documented in the schema, so the description adds no extra semantic value.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description uses a specific verb ('search') and resource ('doorzo.com across Japanese shops') and clearly states the input ('a keyword'). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like doorzo_monitor_add and doorzo_hot_searches, which are about monitoring and trends.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description implies usage for searching across Japanese shops, but does not explicitly state when to use it versus alternatives (e.g., monitoring tools). No exclusions or alternative tool references are mentioned, so guidance is limited to the general purpose.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.